Thomas Friedman talks about disrupters in his latest book, Thank you for Being Late. Being in the middle of this text, it was interesting to read Peter W. Cookson Jr’s article in edweek, 10 Disruptions That will Revolutionize Education. Cookson talks about “moving from distraction to deep learning” as one of the educational challenges we must now address. His disruptions include:
1. Digital learners rebel against intellectual conformity- Yes, our young people are divided by the digital and physical realm, seeking solutions rather than reflection, but his assertion that they multitask easily is wrong. They multitask, but much research shows that they do this at the expense of everything they are doing. Conformity and standardization are things that people in our country have fought for decades, it is not new as Cookson proposes. Long is the complaint against youth that they rebel against conforming to society.
2. Learning avatars will become commonplace.- True there is an increase in the use of intelligent programing that adjusts to the performance of the user. The challenge here is that we will still need to balance the idea of mastery versus time. Our students, teachers, schools, and states are measured on how well students to versus a set curriculum. Since all students do not learn at the same rate, at some point we need to make a choice about moving on and achieving coverage (a court case in California ruled that a class of students who did not cover particular material could not be assessed on it by graduation gatekeeper tests) and proficiency. Further, recent research says that personalization does not actually achieve increased success with material. We really do not know how to utilize electronic platforms to maximize learning.
3. Participatory-learning hubs replace isolated classrooms- Yes, students are increasing linked to the global universe.
4. Inquiry skills will drive learning- Tell that to the science teacher community. For the past 30 years they have been supporting this idea, and it has not caught on. Social studies groups promote the concept of doing the work of historians- reading and analyzing primary source material- but we remain testing the dates of the Civil War. While there is an increase in teamwork and cooperative learning, most implementations of these activities enable little real collaboration. This rolls back to assessment- are we going to do easy assessments with "right" answers or are we going to do complex (read expensive) ones that are more subjective?
5. Capacities will matter more than grades- “Conventional grading is already becoming outdated.” No kidding, but this is not new. Standards based report cards and grading are making strides in some places, but not all. What employers want is a tool to use that says this students is a good bet- they have soft skills like persistence, punctuality, and a willingness to learn as well as hard skills like a basic ability to engage in the three Rs. While capacity to do a job is slowly making inroads into the business community, this is not something we should hold our breath for.
6. Teachers will become inventors- He talks about social emotional learning here, not inventors. I think he is getting at the link between cognitive skills, social emotional skills and creativity. Teachers have been doing this forever. In 1976 when PL 94-142, the federal special education law, was passed, they recognized these links and included both in the analysis of student skills.
7. School leaders will give up their desks- Many people love their desks and will never give them up. The amount of paperwork that the educational bureaucracy requires does not lend itself to deskless lives. “Student agency in a culture of mutual respect” is what he proposes here. While many schools and classrooms are student centered, our insistence on standards of learning limit this. Novice learners need guidance and support to learn and push forward. We can argue about the relevancy of trigonometry and algebra 2 all day, but without outward pressure to learn these subjects, few students would ever engage in them and since they do not have real work application for most people, they would go by the wayside leaving our applied math programs like engineering and science at a loss.
8. Students and families will become co-learners and co-creators- This is an age-old idea, but one that is not shared by many cultures, including those in many low socioeconomic areas and immigrant cultures. Middle class families already are co-learners and have been forever. Engaging the families is not something that will happen on its own but will require careful and concerted effort on the part of the schools.
9. Formal credentials will no longer be the Holy Grail- Centuries ago being a lawyer meant working with a mentor for a while before opening your own shop. The same with doctors. We have formal credentials for a reason- to offer the public some assurance that the individual has a level of skill. We do not have the skill set to go to the doctor and interview him on his knowledge about medicine. We expect that to be taken care of before we pass through his office door. Although many jobs can be completed without formal credentials, employers rely on credentials for screening purposes. Different types of credentials are becoming the norm- online programs are increasingly able to bring education to a greater number of students, apprentice programs are available in some areas. Some form of credentials, however will remain the norm. Portfolios work in some fields and have for a long time- architects showcase their previous work, authors list their past writings, athletes have records of success- but this will not likely spread to all fields.
10. Policymakers will form communities of continuous improvement- Really. How does he propose to get the politicians out of education? We are moving in the opposite direction. While there is a group of think tanks that process research and implement new ideas, these ideas are slow to capture our attention. “New math” has been the social pariah for a long time and was passed over at least once since its conception. Convincing the public to allow and encourage innovative educational policy is an ongoing battle.
I guess I am pretty pessimistic about the disruptions that are proposed. Not that many of them are bad ideas, just that the pace of change in the educational world is so much slower than that of the business world. We talk about our children not keeping up with the global community, and in some ways that is true. I think it boils down more to motivation than to activity- to a theory that they should be allowed to "be kids" rather than mini-learning machines. In China or India your choice is education, hard work and success or dirt floors and public well. Many other parts of the world do not even have the option of education.
Disruptions will change how we educate. Some are bigger forces than others. The bigger mountain, however, is to change society's perception of the role of education. As a country and a culture, we do not have unity on the purpose of education. We are increasingly allowing government to control what we teach and how we teach it. I think perhaps the biggest disrupter will be the people rebelling against the status quo and allowing that a new way of educating might be superior to the one we experienced as youths ourselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment